15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      24-h bronchodilation and inspiratory capacity improvements with glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate via co-suspension delivery technology in COPD

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may vary throughout the day and it is important that therapeutic approaches provide 24-h symptom control. We report the results of two phase IIIb crossover studies, PT003011 and PT003012, investigating the 24-h lung function profile of GFF MDI (glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate 18/9.6 μg delivered using innovative co-suspension delivery technology) administered twice daily.

          Methods

          Patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease received 4 weeks’ treatment with each of GFF MDI, placebo MDI, and open-label tiotropium (PT003011 only). Lung function was assessed over 24 h on day 29 of each treatment period. The primary outcome was forced expiratory volume in 1 second area under the curve from 0 to 24 h (FEV 1AUC 0–24). Other outcomes included change from baseline in average daily rescue medication use over the treatment period. In addition, we conducted a post-hoc analysis of data pooled from both studies to further characterize the effect of GFF MDI on inspiratory capacity.

          Results

          GFF MDI treatment significantly increased FEV 1AUC 0–24 versus placebo in studies PT003011 ( n = 75) and PT003012 ( n = 35) on day 29 (both studies p < 0.0001), with similar improvements in FEV 1AUC versus placebo for hours 0–12 and 12–24. In PT003011, improvements with GFF MDI versus tiotropium in FEV 1AUC were greater during hours 12–24 compared to 0–12 h. GFF MDI treatment also resulted in a significant reduction in rescue medication use versus placebo (−0.84 [ p<0.0001] and −1.11 [ p=0.0054] puffs/day in PT003011 and PT003012, respectively), and versus tiotropium in PT003011 (−0.44 [ p=0.017] puffs/day). A post-hoc pooled analysis showed patients treated with GFF MDI were more likely to achieve a >15% increase from baseline in inspiratory capacity than patients treated with placebo or tiotropium (72.1%, 19.0% and 47.0% of patients, respectively after the evening dose on day 29). There were no significant safety/tolerability findings.

          Conclusions

          GFF MDI significantly improved 24-h lung function versus placebo in patients with moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, with similar benefits in the second 12-h period compared to the first, supporting twice-daily dosing of GFF MDI.

          Trial registration

          Pearl Therapeutics, Inc.; www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02347072 and NCT02347085. Registered 21 January 2015.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Standards for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD: a summary of the ATS/ERS position paper

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Observational study to characterise 24-hour COPD symptoms and their relationship with patient-reported outcomes: results from the ASSESS study

            Background Few studies have investigated the 24-hour symptom profile in patients with COPD or how symptoms during the 24-hour day are inter-related. This observational study assessed the prevalence, severity and relationship between night-time, early morning and daytime COPD symptoms and explored the relationship between 24-hour symptoms and other patient-reported outcomes. Methods The study enrolled patients with stable COPD in clinical practice. Baseline night-time, early morning and daytime symptoms (symptom questionnaire), severity of airflow obstruction (FEV1), dyspnoea (modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale), health status (COPD Assessment Test), anxiety and depression levels (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), sleep quality (COPD and Asthma Sleep Impact Scale) and physical activity level (sedentary, moderately active or active) were recorded. Results The full analysis set included 727 patients: 65.8% male, mean ± standard deviation age 67.2 ± 8.8 years, % predicted FEV1 52.8 ± 20.5%. In each part of the 24-hour day, >60% of patients reported experiencing ≥1 symptom in the week before baseline. Symptoms were more common in the early morning and daytime versus night-time (81.4%, 82.7% and 63.0%, respectively). Symptom severity was comparable for each period assessed. Overall, in the week before baseline, 56.7% of patients had symptoms throughout the whole 24-hour day (3 parts of the day); 79.9% had symptoms in ≥2 parts of the 24-hour day. Symptoms during each part of the day were inter-related, irrespective of disease severity (all p < 0.001). Early morning and daytime symptoms were associated with the severity of airflow obstruction (p < 0.05 for both). Night-time, early morning and daytime symptoms were all associated with worse dyspnoea, health status and sleep quality, and higher anxiety and depression levels (all p < 0.001 versus patients without symptoms in each corresponding period). In each part of the 24-hour day, there was also an association between symptoms and a patient’s physical activity level (p < 0.05 for each period). Conclusions More than half of patients experienced COPD symptoms throughout the whole 24-hour day. There was a significant relationship between night-time, early morning and daytime symptoms. In each period, symptoms were associated with worse patient-reported outcomes, suggesting that improving 24-hour symptoms should be an important consideration in the management of COPD. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-014-0122-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Patient insight into the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the morning: an internet survey.

              To determine diurnal variability of symptoms in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to assess the impact of COPD upon patients' morning activities and routines. Quantitative internet interviews with 803 COPD patients from Europe and the USA, including 289 patients with severe COPD. Severe COPD was defined according to regular use of COPD medication, third level of breathlessness or above using the modified Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea scale (MRC dyspnoea score > or =3) and one or more COPD exacerbations in the preceding 12 months. Morning was the worst time of day for COPD symptoms, particularly in patients with severe COPD (reported by 46% of severe patients). In these patients, shortness of breath was the most frequently reported symptom, correlating strongly with problems experienced with morning activities. Morning activities most affected by COPD were walking up and down stairs, putting on shoes and socks, making the bed, dressing, showering or bathing and drying. The majority of patients were not taking their medication in time for it to exert its optimal effect. Many patients consider the impact of COPD on morning activities to be substantial. Physicians should question patients about morning activities to assess disease impact and to advise regarding the optimal time to use therapy. This was an internet-based questionnaire survey and possible bias in patient selection and self-reported diagnosis of COPD and its severity should be taken into account.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                creisner@pearltherapeutics.com
                ggottschlich@nhcr.com
                FFakih@FPCResearch.com
                akoser@gmail.com
                jkrainson@clinicaltrialsfla.com
                DeLaCruz@greenvillemedresearch.com
                sarora@aventivresearch.com
                gfeld3232@aol.com
                krishna@ASHAresearch.com
                Shahid.Siddiqui@astrazeneca.com
                chad.orevillo@comcast.net
                amaes@pearltherapeutics.com
                estrose@pearltherapeutics.com
                Ubaldo.Martin@astrazeneca.com
                Journal
                Respir Res
                Respir. Res
                Respiratory Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1465-9921
                1465-993X
                18 August 2017
                18 August 2017
                2017
                : 18
                : 157
                Affiliations
                [1 ]AstraZeneca, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.418152.b, , Pearl Therapeutics, Inc., ; 280 Headquarters Plaza, East Tower, Morristown, NJ 07960 USA
                [3 ]New Horizons Clinical Research, Cincinnati, OH USA
                [4 ]Florida Pulmonary Research Institute, Winter Park, FL USA
                [5 ]Palmetto Medical Research Associates, Easley, SC USA
                [6 ]Clinical Trials of Florida, Miami, FL USA
                [7 ]Greenville Pharmaceutical Research, Greenville, SC USA
                [8 ]Aventiv Research, Columbus, OH USA
                [9 ]S. Carolina Pharmaceutical Research, Spartanburg, SC USA
                [10 ]Upstate Pharmaceutical Research, Greenville, SC USA
                [11 ]Former employee of Pearl Therapeutics, Inc., Morristown, NJ USA
                Article
                636
                10.1186/s12931-017-0636-4
                5563048
                28821260
                643821c7-4643-454a-9ce9-18cc93cbc571
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 8 May 2017
                : 3 August 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: This study was funded by Pearl Therapeutics, Inc., a member of the AstraZeneca Group.
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Respiratory medicine
                copd,muscarinic antagonists,β2-agonist,co-suspension delivery technology,metered dose inhaler,smoking,chronic bronchitis,emphysema,bronchodilator

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content40

                Cited by9

                Most referenced authors333